sorry for asking again, but did you have time to implement the fullscreen qr-code function, (when making a payment, show the qrcode on full-screen so that you can rotate your screen to the customer and let him read it off the screen, hiding all the other data that you dont want him to see) we discussed this a while ago.

The next UI work I want to do is:1) Add in an 'Outlook Bar' with the wallets down the left hand side. Remove the 'Your Wallets' screen.

2) Add a bitcoin ticker in the top right (in the header) with the exchange rate on it.

3) Add in a "Display as" combo box in the top right of the send and receive screens where the user can choose how to display the send/ receive info. One of the options in there (or probably a button on the "Display as QR code" display) will be to zoom to the whole MultiBit panel.The 'zoomed' QR code will have a back or cancel or something button on to return it to the normal size.This should be what you are after. If you have MultiBit full screen it will be fullscreen - if it is, say, in a corner it will be whole of the screen space you have allocated to MultiBit.

I expect that will be a couple of weeks work (more or less) to work through those.

There are more details of these in Mike's thread about bitcoinj V0.4 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=68004.0) but basically they are a much better way of storing the bitcoinj wallets (which MultiBit uses). Because it is migrating everybody's wallets I will probably have a release dedicated solely to that.

(One of the reasons of putting in the 'export/ import private key' functionality is that that will be one of the recommended precautionary steps in the migration process).

Protobuf wallets are basically better in that:1) They are less brittle than the earlier wallets hence easier to update2) They will be standard across all of bitcoinj (Andreas's Android Bitcoin Wallet has already migrated to the new format)3) C++ programs can read them easily4) They will be a lot smaller.

Once this migration is done it opens the way to adding in watch only wallets and encrypted wallets which I know everybody wants.

Hey, I tried sending 3 btc from my 1EyxRJKRZrKf6iANv5UeZE7TQAC5CEa2KT wallet, to pay someone at 1LXTiSb6NdekLvYXtg3sEtyMZetQmGpqDR The transaction never completed, so I reset the block chain. After resetting, the blockchain the transaction didn't even appear on the transaction bar. Any suggestions? (The coins sent where not present in wallet either.)

Just had a look at blockchain.info for both 1EyxRJKRZrKf6iANv5UeZE7TQAC5CEa2KT and 1LXTiSb6NdekLvYXtg3sEtyMZetQmGpqDR(which I expect you probably have done as well).

There are a couple of things:1) There does not seem to be any transaction 1Ey -> 1LX (not even an unconfirmed one) which suggests the transaction was either: 1.1) Not transmitted to the bitcoin network by MultiBit (possible, but you should get an error message when you send it)or 1.2) Not relayed by the nodes

2) I notice in blockchain.info that the balance available to spend at 1Ey is 1.3ish BTC i.e. less than the 3 BTC that you were trying to send.(the last send from 1Ey was 1st March - I assume you tried to send the 3BTC send after that). If you did send 3BTC from an address with just the 1.3ish BTC to spend then it would never confirm no (all miners would reject it).

Normally, you would not be able to do a send of 3BTC in MultiBit from a wallet with a balance less than that (it checks the balance prior to sending) but if you did a send whilst it was syncing or have multiple private keys in multiple wallets it would be possible to send it. I would never confirm though as it would never get into a block as I have mentioned. I do not know this as I do not know exactly what you have done.

tl;dr; Do the transactions in the wallet with the 1Ey address match what is in the blockchain after a 'reset blockchain and transactions' ? If so, then the transaction you tried to send did not make it into the blockchain. Try sending an amount that you are sure is in the wallet (after the reset blockchain).

Just had a look at blockchain.info for both 1EyxRJKRZrKf6iANv5UeZE7TQAC5CEa2KT and 1LXTiSb6NdekLvYXtg3sEtyMZetQmGpqDR(which I expect you probably have done as well).

There are a couple of things:1) There does not seem to be any transaction 1Ey -> 1LX (not even an unconfirmed one) which suggests the transaction was either: 1.1) Not transmitted to the bitcoin network by MultiBit (possible, but you should get an error message when you send it)or 1.2) Not relayed by the nodes

2) I notice in blockchain.info that the balance available to spend at 1Ey is 1.3ish BTC i.e. less than the 3 BTC that you were trying to send.(the last send from 1Ey was 1st March - I assume you tried to send the 3BTC send after that). If you did send 3BTC from an address with just the 1.3ish BTC to spend then it would never confirm no (all miners would reject it).

Normally, you would not be able to do a send of 3BTC in MultiBit from a wallet with a balance less than that (it checks the balance prior to sending) but if you did a send whilst it was syncing or have multiple private keys in multiple wallets it would be possible to send it. I would never confirm though as it would never get into a block as I have mentioned. I do not know this as I do not know exactly what you have done.

tl;dr; Do the transactions in the wallet with the 1Ey address match what is in the blockchain after a 'reset blockchain and transactions' ? If so, then the transaction you tried to send did not make it into the blockchain. Try sending an amount that you are sure is in the wallet (after the reset blockchain).

@MushroomizedI am interested: did you get MultiBit to apparently send a transaction of 3BTC when there was a balance of less than 3BTC in the wallet ?That is something I should stop happening if at all possible as it will cause similar confusion to other people.

I mean did it appear to send it successfully (no error, no validation message) even though it never actually got onto the blockchain ?

how would you characterize your wallet vs Armory in terms of what users like me would want?

i'm alittle amazed at how many alternative wallets are being developed and the amount of effort and time being put into them. for what purpose? you certainly aren't being paid right now and if Armory takes off and becomes more popular won't all your efforts be for naught?

i guess there's something about these open source projects that i don't understand. enlighten me.

That is a very good question.I know we normally think of software in terms of the packaged, finished product but in my opinion it is actually the codebase that is more important.

Underneath there is, as you point out, a ton of work to get everything working cleanly. For instance Miron in bitcoinj has done some great work on the class that connects to the bitcoin network (called PeerGroup). You can literally pull out your network cable and when you put it back it it recovers the connection and continues downloading blocks as if nothing has happened. I was pretty impressed when I noticed that.

You are right I am not making a milli from MultiBit as it is all open-source. That is great ! It means anyone can reuse the codebase for any bitcoin app they like.

From the users ie your point of view I hope they will end up with an easy to use bitcoin client that is bugfree and small/light enough to run off a USB or tiny computer.

The underlying codebase - in Java - is pretty easy to port to other types of machines. For instance Android phones use Java. Andreas's Android Bitcoin Wallet uses the same bitcoinj codebase.

Whilst I do not intend to do it (too much work) you can also port the MultiBit/ bitcoinj code into corporate environments using Java Enterprise Edition. This is used in a lot of code shops for backend processing.

One of the reasons we are integrating XChange is that it will make it easy for other people to hook into their own systems.

It looks like I am developing a standalone wallet but I think of it as an enabler to other people who want to use field tested software for their own bitcoin use cases.

Similarly I am sure etotheipi is working to get his codebase and Armory out to the masses. Good luck to him ! If I can help him I am certainly happy to help.

not being a coder i guess i fail to see that there are numerous systems out there to address and that need a working viable base code upon which to build.

this is what i love about the open source community having only been exposed to it thru Bitcoin over the last year as an investor. ppl like you who have only good intentions trying to make the world a better place.

i think you guys are all headed in the right direction and one day soon your work will be recognized as being revolutionary.

You can see it another way - there's enough scope for innovation in Bitcoin wallet software that having a few competing implementations is probably a good thing in the long run. The trick is explaining it to new users.

3) Add in a "Display as" combo box in the top right of the send and receive screens where the user can choose how to display the send/ receive info. One of the options in there (or probably a button on the "Display as QR code" display) will be to zoom to the whole MultiBit panel.The 'zoomed' QR code will have a back or cancel or something button on to return it to the normal size.This should be what you are after. If you have MultiBit full screen it will be fullscreen - if it is, say, in a corner it will be whole of the screen space you have allocated to MultiBit.I expect that will be a couple of weeks work (more or less) to work through those.